From Blanchot's The Writing of The Disaster

Amoung certain "primitive" peoples (those whose society knows no State) the cheif must prove his dominion over words: silence is forbidden him. Yet it is not required that anyone listen to him. Indeed, no one pays attention to the cheif's word, or rather all feign inattention; and he, in fact, says nothing, but repeats the celebration of the traditional norms of life. To what requirment of primitive society does this empty language, which emanates from the apparent locus of power, answer? The discourse of the cheif is empty precisely because he is seperated from power---it is the society itself which is the locus of power. The cheif must move in the element of the word, which is to say, at the oppostie pole from violence. the cheifs obligation to speak---that constant flow of empty speech (not empty, but traditional, sheer transmission), which he owes to the tribe--- is the infinite debt which effectively rules out speaking man's ever becoming a man of power.

In this context we are the primitive people, or as Benjamin says and I'll paraphrase because this is a lot of quotes to ask people to read, a primitive legal system where the death penalty is imposed for certain crime and offenses against property. Does George Bush have dominion over his words? Not at first glance, but when you read on you realize he does on a profound level. Like one of his former speech writers said, 'People always think George W. Bush is a stupid man with good intentions, but the opposite is actually true.' I get caught up on the next sentence. It says it is not required that anyone listen to him. Perhaps Benjamin can help here. People do not listen to George Bush, save for the militarism or "predatory violence." It is not out of respect but out of fear. One of Bush's campaign managers said that they would campaign and win the re-election on two things, Optimism and Fear.

"He, in fact, says nothing, but repeats the celebration of the traditional norms of life."

"The world is a safer place now that Saddam has been captured." But what about your claims of imminent danger? Exactly what are the ties between Osama and Saddam? "The world is a safer place now that Saddam has been captured."

It is the society itself which is the locus of power.

This is the problem. Does anyone know this? The myth of revolution is dead and no one knows why. It's just a longer list of questions that continue to confuse me. I don't understand who supports Mr. Bush. Who is still fooled?